He doesn't straighten it up persay,he just has an inane ability of running off the shoulders of players finding gaps and mismatches,no point really running off Ford who doesn't run with the ball at all for England whereas Farrell does make the odd line break. His best chance would be playing off Cips or off an offloading Manu or Teo.

He doesn't straighten it up persay,he just has an inane ability of running off the shoulders of players finding gaps and mismatches,no point really running off Ford who doesn't run with the ball at all for England whereas Farrell does make the odd line break. His best chance would be playing off Cips or off an offloading Manu or Teo.

Gaps and mismatches are what it's about.
This idea that seems to run through the England set up that you must send like for like players crashing into eachother is stupid.
May has been England's best attacker, he is on the lookout for mismatches constantly.
Ford would enjoy having a runner like Ashton in his team, as would Farrell.
Isn't it really the basics of what having two playmakers is supposed to be for with one offering short passes inside and out and the other free as a second playmaker, if you aren't offering the 10 any intelligent runners then is it any surprise that he is ineffective!
Something Leicester could well consider in my opinion!

It is what it's about BFG,my point being the OP has a different idea to me what straightening it up means. And just like "earning the right to go wide" your ball carriers have to earn the right to get these mismatches by sucking in more than one defender and offloading or taking contact and cleaning out rapidly for quick ball. You have to have ball carriers in your backs or back row,every single team in world rugby have them. You have to fix defenders and keep them honest,players who dont straighten it up are easy to defend against because you know it's just gonna be shovelled on.

And I'm of the opinion that two playmakers is a red herring. I'm struggling to think at domestic,European or international level where it has actually worked. Sarries recent dominance had Barritt a defensive bosher at 12. Chief have Hill another carrier. The great Leinster side had Darcy at 12,hardly a playmaker.Arguably the greatest centre partnership of all time had Nonu at 12,a carrier predominantly. Australia play Kerevi or Kuridrani who are carriers,this Ireland side Aki or Henshaw or both,the old mighty SA side played JDV,the list goes on and on.

It is what it's about BFG,my point being the OP has a different idea to me what straightening it up means. And just like "earning the right to go wide" your ball carriers have to earn the right to get these mismatches by sucking in more than one defender and offloading or taking contact and cleaning out rapidly for quick ball. You have to have ball carriers in your backs or back row,every single team in world rugby have them. You have to fix defenders and keep them honest,players who dont straighten it up are easy to defend against because you know it's just gonna be shovelled on.

IMO you are still playing who can bosh the biggest and have we not learned that South Africa beat us at that!
The most fragmented part of a rugby field to attack is around your 10 and between the opposition forwards and backs.
That's the part of the field where the mismatches are to be found most often.
It's where Ford is most effective with those short timed passes to intelligent runs and pulling defences out of shape is where the second playmaker comes into play.
I watched Cipriani struggle with the same dilemma when I watched a replay of the 3rd test.

We didn't lose because of SA bosh,we lost because Ford gives up so many metres in the midfield that we had to defend narrow and were destroyed out wide! As for Cips,he didn't get any ball because it was a clear premeditated plan to play everything off 9 so I don't think it's fair to judge Danny on that one game. Refer to my other post as regards to the two playmakers.

We didn't lose because of SA bosh,we lost because Ford gives up so many metres in the midfield that we had to defend narrow and were destroyed out wide! As for Cips,he didn't get any ball because it was a clear premeditated plan to play everything off 9 so I don't think it's fair to judge Danny on that one game. Refer to my other post as regards to the two playmakers.

Ha yep we lost solely because of Ford! Nothing to do with the forwards being rubbish or Slade being like a barn door in defence. Ridiculous statement.